4.6 Article

Safety of Revascularization Deferral of Left Main Stenosis Based on Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Evaluation

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 13, Issue 14, Pages 1655-1664

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.035

Keywords

coronary physiology; left main coronary artery disease; registry-based study; resting intracoronary index

Funding

  1. Amgen
  2. Wellcome Trust [212183/Z/18/Z]
  3. Academy of Medical Sciences
  4. Imperial Biomedical Research Centre
  5. Medical Research Council [G1000357]
  6. British Heart Foundation [FS/11/46/28861]
  7. Philips Volcano
  8. MRC [G1000357] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with left main coronary artery (LM) stenosis in whom treatment strategy was based on the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). BACKGROUND The overall safety of iFR to guide revascularization decision making in patients with stable coronary artery disease has been established. However, no study has examined the safety of deferral of revascularization of LM disease on the basis of iFR. METHODS This multicenter observational study included 314 patients in whom LM stenosis was deferred (n = 163 [51.9%]) or revascularized (n = 151 [48.1%]) according to the iFR cutoff <= 0.89. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were each individual component of the primary endpoint and also cardiac death. RESULTS At a median follow-up period of 30 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 15 patients (9.2%) in the deferred group and 22 patients (14.6%) in the revascularized group (hazard ratio: 1.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.75 to 2.81; p = 0.26), indicating no evidence of a significant difference between the 2 groups. For the secondary endpoints, findings in the iFR-based deferral and revascularization groups were as follows: all-cause death, 3.7% versus 4.6%; cardiac death, 1.2% versus 2.0%; nonfatal myocardial infarction, 2.5% versus 5.3%; and target lesion revascularization, 4.3% versus 5.3% (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS Deferral of revascularization of LM stenosis on the basis of iFR appears to be safe, with similar long-term outcomes to those in patients in whom LM revascularization was performed according to iFR values. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available